Benchmark: Unique Array [Set vs. Generator]

Script Preparation code:

function* _unique(iterable, ) {
    const cache = new Set();

    for (const item of iterable) {
        if (!cache.has(item)) {
            cache.add(item);
            yield item;
        }
    }
}

Tests:

Set
const array = Array.from('YYYY-MM-DD[T]HH:mm:ss.SSSZ'); [...new Set(array)];
Generator
const array = Array.from('YYYY-MM-DD[T]HH:mm:ss.SSSZ'); [..._unique(array)];

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Set
Generator

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

No previous run results

This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one to run it!

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases.

**Benchmark Definition:**
The benchmark is designed to compare two approaches for creating an array of unique elements from a given string:

1. Using `Array.from()` and `[...new Set()]` (Set approach)
2. Using a generator function `_unique()` that yields unique elements (Generator approach)

**Script Preparation Code:**

```javascript
function* _unique(iterable, ) {
    const cache = new Set();
    
    for (const item of iterable) {
        if (!cache.has(item)) {
            cache.add(item);
            yield item;
        }
    }
}
```

This generator function takes an iterable as input and uses a `Set` to keep track of unique elements. It iterates over the input iterable, adds each element to the set if it's not already present, and yields the element.

**Html Preparation Code:**

There is no HTML preparation code provided for this benchmark.

**Individual Test Cases:**
The benchmark has two test cases:

1. **Set**: Creates an array of unique elements using `Array.from()` and `[...new Set()]`.
```javascript
const array = Array.from('YYYY-MM-DD[T]HH:mm:ss.SSSZ');
[...new Set(array)];
```

2. **Generator**: Uses the `_unique()` generator function to create an array of unique elements.
```javascript
const array = Array.from('YYYY-MM-DD[T]HH:mm:ss.SSSZ');
[_unique(array)].map(item => item);
```

**Pros and Cons:**

1. **Set approach**:
	* Pros:
		+ Fast and efficient, as it leverages the optimized implementation of `Set`.
		+ Easy to read and understand.
	* Cons:
		+ Requires creating an intermediate array using `Array.from()`, which can be memory-intensive for large inputs.
2. **Generator approach**:
	* Pros:
		+ Memory-efficient, as it uses a generator function that yields values on-the-fly without storing them in memory.
		+ Can handle large inputs without significant memory allocation.
	* Cons:
		+ Less intuitive and less readable than the Set approach.
		+ Requires understanding of generator functions.

**Library:**
None

**Special JS feature or syntax:** None (although using a generator function is a common JavaScript pattern)

**Other Alternatives:**

1. Using `Array.from()` with a custom callback function that filters out duplicates could be another alternative, but it would not provide the same efficiency as the Set approach.
2. Using a library like Lodash's `uniq` function or Ramda's `uniqueBy` function could also be used to create an array of unique elements. However, these libraries would add overhead and are not as efficient as the built-in `Set` implementation.

Overall, the benchmark provides a good comparison between two approaches for creating an array of unique elements in JavaScript, highlighting the trade-offs between memory efficiency and readability.

Related benchmarks:

Unique Array [Set vs. Generator] (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Set vs Generator

Created: 4 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Set

Generator

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):